|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Just a Guess wrote:
You have to stick to the rules where they exist. If someone does something outside of those you're allowed to, supposed to, and even encouraged to reward the creative solutions by coming up with some way of resolving them mechanically.
Chris Mortika wrote:
Its not always a particularly viable one.
Tiny Venue: There's one table. He's at it. Not playing with him means not playing
Slightly larger venue: There's two tables. You want to play high, you may have already played the other scenario. A table not happening means they collapse into 1 and you have to go home.
Even at a larger venue the celestial bodies of scenario you can play, character you want / need to play to make that eyes of 10 game next week can bring you into the same orbit and leaving when they show up can cause a scene.
Over on the rpg.net forum, someone posted the crazy and scary thought that Cersi might win the game of thrones because everyone else is either dead or too weak to challenge her. *eek*
Speculative but fairly likely:
Cersie is prophesied, by a reliable source, to be killed by her vonquolor: which means little monster or little brother. Tyrion is an obvious fit...but it was mentioned during a discussion of dornish laws of succession that cersei is older than Jamie by a few minutes, making him a viable candidate. There's also been more than a few references of them leaving the world together like they came into it.
It is if you're a sword n' board ranger.. (which in pfs i would strongly consider for every sword and board martial, because they get that at level 6)
I figured since this was a playtest; they would go easier on the "if you die in the special, your character dies as well" bit. Would prefer to go the route of WBG 1.
The absolute worst that happens is that you make a new character and he dies for you.
More likely you sell all the aspis agents stuff and buy a res, he's fine, no effects carry over.
Sticks head out of cartoon esque swirl of squabbling pathfinders
Hello, and welcome to the institution!
The thing is in PFS you can never be sure what kind of party composition you're going to get. You're going on the adventure with whatever characters sit down at the table with you so you have to prepare for the worst and make your surprises pleasant.
You can't leave out the wand because you're downright unlikely to have someone capable of keeping you healed up. (Healing has become a difficult/suboptimal option over the years, and healing is often considered boring, so you probably won't have a healer)
You can't leave out ranged because your party could consist entirely of a barbarian with an axe, a sword and board fighter, a magus, a monk, and a melee druid.
That same group could also have trouble with swarms. On a different night you could have 6 support characters and no front liners. (almost had this happen in a special)
You go into the dungeon with the team you have: not the team you want. You can pick your nose, but not your adventuring companions, so you have to pick your gear accordingly.
PFS makes it very easy to be prepared to do a large number of things well enough
Wands are "Freeish" : you have extra cash in the form of prestige points to get the wand.
You can buy alchemists fire, usually gets you through swarms, since they catch fire and take extra damage from it.
A sling costs nothing, weighs nothing, and you can use rocks to shoot it for half a point of damage less (1d4 vs 1d3) nd a -1 to hit.
If there's a specialist you let them handle it. If there isn't you have to step up.
If half the conversation is reading your words the same way, maybe its not the entire rest of the world thats crazy.
And when you get him to 1 hit point and he walks into the next fight, is that also not leaving him to die?
I'll tell you what: if I'm a GM at that table, and if this guy hasn't pissed me off with selfish behavior (and "not having a wand of CLW" doesn't rise to selfish behavior in my book), and I see you walk away and let a fellow Pathfinder die because you don't want to spend charges from your precious wand, I'm going to mark your character evil and no longer playable in PFS.
pH unbalanced wrote:
Eh boss, this one ain't payin his union dues into the CLW company health plan. You want me to make him a 2pp offer he can't refuse?
I believe that not healing him is a coping mechanism. It seemed to work in this case.
If the guy really is a problem player, talk to the GM and gameday coordinator about it, and see if you can get him kicked out.
That seems WAY harsher than not healing him. Also incredibly problematic, as there's no rule that says you have to provide your own healing.
Consider that if you're willing to let other characters die when you could have stopped it, you might in fact be the problem player.
Considered but rejected. While I think not stabilizing them would be unconscionable, burning through a wand of CLW on their behalf after warnings 1 2 and 3 is above and beyond cooperation.
I don't know how relevant the paradigm of a heavily armored tank taking hits for the party has been since 3.0 , but in PFS it seems to be pretty passe. There's usually a lot of melee upfront with the bad guys and no aggro mechanic to stop the easiest among them from getting hit.
I get the "don't demand that other players always spend all their resources to heal you" attitude, and I get that some players are abusive about it. But I'm really annoyed by what sounds like a "I refuse to spend any of my non-renewable resources to heal somebody else who doesn't have their own wand" attitude, and yet it sounds like that's the lesson you're trying to teach somebody by letting their character die.
Whats the alternative then for stopping the first attitude from winning just by being obstinate about it?
I believe the response was brought on by the implication of either walking away from the table (which punishes everyone) or letting him die (which will probably anger him to the point of punishing anyone) or letting the opportunity slip by to stabilize him and leave him in a compromising position with a handy piece of statuary- which would probably get your point across just as effectively.
depending on the player, I might do the same thing. I have definitely performed triage in scenarios and would count such a player as low priority. to a certain extent, support characters are expected to handle the back-end stuff like healing.
The problem there is that PFS is not a home game where a support character dedicated to healing is a given/likely. Chances are pretty good in PFS that of not having any support characters, and almost certain not to have one that can cover healing someone else without dipping into expendables.
Step 1: Google Archives of nethys Item i dunno is legal
That funny white X next to the name is the glyph of the open road, symbol of the pathfinder society, meaning its pfs legal.
Archives of nethys is good, but if you want to double check it that page tells you it comes out of ultimate equipment on page 172.
If you go to the page Nefreet linked and ctrl f "ultimate equipment" and click next a time or two you see ultimate equipment.
All rings on pages 166-177 are legal for play.
So you're good.
I was expecting...
-Being PFS dm means you're stuck with a slavish devotion to raw.
-I'm reading raw to provide this absurd mechanical advantage so you're stuck with it
-PFS is a uniform experience
-PFS dms have access to a set of rules that will end table variation.
-PFS means the adventure is stuck on railroad tracks.
-there's some sort of a qualification to be a pfs dm (Pffth. How do you think i got in?)
-If there's no stats in the mod for it you can't interact with it.
I dunno, when the PALADIN is telling you to steal something you know its dangerous.
In fact, the post I was replying compared going to GenCon once a year to GMing game days for the entire year. This is just as, if not a more, off-base comparison than comparing the con to a game day.
Part of what grates is that it doesn't matter HOW many game days you dm: the con goer still has better rewards. You can extrapolate out who has what for once a week, bi monthly, monthly or even once a day and that doesn't change: the con goer has the better reward. Con is greater than X days regardless of the value of X.
You misrepresent entirely what I'm talking about. (Although, to be fair, I misrepresented what I was talking about a bit. The person was noting that a year's worth of gameday gaming is way more work than a single con, and if you do it weekly, then, yes, I agree with that.)
At some point the game day dm is doing work that should be rewarded more than it is now. At some point a game day dm is doing the same amount of work as a con game dm. At SOME point, the game day DM is doing more work, incurring more expense, and eating up more time. You can argue incomparables about when exactly those points are hit, but given point 1 above it doesn't really matter that much:
Do the math again, but on a per session basis. You keep comparing -the con- to -a game day- but no one is suggesting this is a fair comparison.
Geeks are known for both lacking social skills and not taking criticism well, no matter how its put. I think ruffling some feathers is inevitable.
I believe the trend is that you can't retrain away a prerequisite
You'd be able to take it as either class if you met the requirements on both?
James McTeague wrote:
Irony. He should have a hoard.
You can't hit a gray area of the rules and then try to hit the dm over the head with what the rule is.
Tricks like this are one thing in a home game where you can work out some reasonable compromise between raw, rai, and that newton fellow once and go from there, but in PFS you'll be forcing the issue in combat, on a time limit, repeatedly, and thats not fun for anyone.
Undead Mitch wrote:
Do they have enough wealth on them to sell it all and buy a ressurection?
If not, you can just start a new #####-25 , Name him doornail, and apply the death to him rather than losing your level 6 character or half your level 6 characters gear.
Sure you can. just "rent" them a folio... :)
Joe Ducey wrote:
Making it last years model for the race boon would be a good compromise.
This is exactly part of the reason cons get support. Because GM's (and players who generally have a chance at boons if not race boons) will travel so far to go to one. Our last local con saw players from 2.5-3 hours away
Ok, but how many games did they get in? Likely 6 or 7. So thats ~1 game per hour traveled. If you live in the sticks you can wrack up something close to that if not higher getting to game days. (and thats driving. Don't get me started on the National Lampoonesque adventures in public transport..)
The comparison keeps getting made between 1 game day and 1 con. There's no way that's a rational comparison. ]
Mark Stratton wrote:
Your previous argument went into the organization for the event, which is not done by individual dms. That makes it a completely different argument which does not address the issue.
How much prep any individual DM Puts into a game can vary greatly. The significant variable there is likely the DM, not the venue.
GM online. Organize your own local cons. People here have given several suggestions on how to get those boons without flooding the market with even more of them. I don't know why those options don't work for you.
First, you're missing half the point. Its not just how one person can get a boon. Its how we can encourage our own local communities. Me dming at a con isn't going to fix that. Secondly the suggestions assume that the entire country is the same as where they're sitting, usually in a big metropolis. They simply don't work everywhere.
Organize your own local cons-
You have to realize that not every location is the same as yours. You can roll out of bed and land in the mecca of gaming. Less populated areas simply do not have the population or gamer population to do this.
Getting that many geeks together for that long is simply not a possibility everywhere.
Not everyone likes dming online. The preferred tabletop for this is rolld20, which has given me enough frustration to avoid it where possible.
In short your suggestions, particularly the first one, do not work for everyone. Giving them repeatedly doesn't change that.
without flooding the market with even more of them
This is, I think, the real issue. Some people have them and don't want to see them "devalued" by more people having access to them.
Mark Stratton wrote:
It takes a great deal of effort to organize an event like that, to say nothing of our local 3 day cons. Regular game days, in my own experience, sort of run on their own - they get schedule, you get players and GMs, and away they go
This would be an argument if the organizers were the one getting the boons. But there's little difference between organizing to DM for a con vs DMing for a game day.
Unlike charm, dominate makes the animal your meat puppet.
Dominate animal establishes a mental link between you and the subject creature. The animal can be directed by silent mental command as long as it remains in range. You need not see the creature to control it. You do not receive direct sensory input from the creature, but you know what it is experiencing. Because you are directing the animal with your own intelligence, it may be able to undertake actions normally beyond its own comprehension. You need not concentrate exclusively on controlling the creature unless you are trying to direct it to do something it normally couldn't do. Changing your instructions or giving a dominated creature a new command is the equivalent of redirecting a spell, so it is a move action.
So they only need to make it spend a move action if they want it to operate a door knob or something.
Andreas Forster wrote:
I can't decide if thats better or worse. Sure, nothing ever saves against the wizard and his mighty +6 int headband, but at least the fighter has his own vorpal flaming holy avenger. How you compare to your party members is at least as important as how you compare to the dungeon.
Their character's levels made it possible to play the higher tier. I was ineffective in combat to say the least.
Well, why is that their fault? Were you straddling the border? Deciding which character to play can be a bit of a catch 22. If they go high you my be useless if you're a front line meleer. If they go low, they'll roflstopm the scenario and get less gold. Other people have a right to pick which character to play with a scenario, either because its thematic , has a faction plot point, they feel like playing that character, they need to level a character to get him into a slot later...
I tried to be helpful, but I don’t feel like I was. During the course of the scenario I felt I was able to make contributions twice. Both times my choice of actions was met with a comment about it messing something up.
Without knowing the specifics its hard to comment on that. That could be anything from a core rulebook to the head worthy offense of metagaming on their part to you actually messing something up that you should have known not to.
Same way druids buy mistletoe.